Fast forward... we win the presidency... who would be a good veep?

[salin]

Not as a candidate (forget 'electability calculus' for a moment) - but as a vice president - working congress that is gop dominated but by close margins. We are going to lose a senate seat (MA or NC, both have rep governors who will appoint replacement) - and with retirements and various predictions the senate will remain close but republican. However - there are several gop senators who are often likely to cross lines... if the power plays are done correctly. But we won't have committee chairs and the respective power. House margin will likely shrink - but with the Tx redistricting shenanigans - it gets even harder to predict a house turnover to dem.

Now - think 2002-04 - DeLay and Frist hardball. Unprecedented moves at usurping power.

Needed: Big political experience, nerves of steal, as manipulative of the process and other party as the GOP has begun, demonstrated success at hard to win legislative showdowns. We need a closer.

Mental models: Majority Leader (then veep, then pres.) Lyndon Johnson; former House appropriations chair (and later ousted and fallen from public grace) Dan Rostenkowski (crooked - but very hard hitting political power player.)

I have been thinking about this for a week for so - very, very few names come to mind. So I ask duers to think long and hard - not for "electability" - but for once in the position - up for the task... someone who can strategize and give support (and cover when needed) to hill Dem leaders.

As I thought about this one name came to mind. Not terribly popular.. but ran the California house - against Wilson - with effectiveness (at least according to the GOP who hated him with a passion).... Willie Brown.

Surely there are others across the country - and/or in DC - who have the tenacity and fight to be effective as Veep - in these very, difficult time with one of the most powerhungry/corrupt congresses ever. Any ideas...?

[mzmolly]

1. Howard Dean.

:hi: 12 years as a beloved successful Governor of Vermont. A record of balancing budgets and pragmatic solutions! Yep, HD...

[salin]

3. I like dean, and balanced budgetsand all that...

but beyond the civil unions (which was more related to courts)... I am not familiar of a record of serious showdowns against republicans who are intent on political warfare... am looking for examples of 'warrior' politicians (so to speak.)

I think Dean has a role to play as a leader - and don't see him disappearing anytime soon.

Just trying to get to some other names of contemporary politicians - who have the fight in them that will be needed legislatively to deal with tom delay and crew.

[mzmolly]

27. Well look at this election! Shit talk about a warrior!

Dean is THE WARRIOR of 2004...

[pmbryant]

2. Senator Harry Reid fits your description pretty well I think

He's the most successfully hardball national Democratic legislator I am aware of at the moment.

I'll see if I can think of anyone else, but he is the first one to come to mind.

--Peter

[salin]

4. come to think of it... he is pretty good

in a very quiet way... very steely.

Another senator who seems to be getting both more savvy - and much more irritated with the shenanigans on the right (and thus more likely to get that the nature of the beast - in terms of dealing with the gop in congress - has radically changed of late) is Sen. Dorgan. Funny - a couple of years ago he is not one that would have come to mind as a possible fighter.

[Leilani]

47. Isn't Harry Reid

the Demoratic Whip?

If so, he has to be effective, although with Daschle, it's tough.

[King of New Orleans]

5. I don't think Bob Graham

is "hardball" but I do think he knows the ins and outs of the process.

[salin]

7. I like Graham... a lot.

Not sure if he had to do showdowns when he was Governor. Don't know how he does with 'hardball' - but he did stand against a lot of folks on the IWR - even though his reason for objecting was different than most of those who objected. Would have to know more about his tenure as governor to get a sense of how tough he is (legislatively.)

[OKNancy]

6. Robert Wexler

I've been smitten with him since the Florida 2000 mess. He seems to really be bold and fearless. Good liberal too.

( If anyone doesn't know who this is..take a look at the webpage , then you will recognize him http://www.house.gov/wexler/ )

[salin]

8. He is a pitbull - isn't he

he was one who worked tirelessly on baring naked the energy bill.. on info about the imploding enron... and continues to give the DOD headaches via congressional letter/inquiries (that go public) about the circumstances surrounding the nobid iraq contracts.

He certainly fits the bill.

[OKNancy]

15. Your post made me think of the VP

position in a different way. I would have never thought of Wexler, but now that it's on my brain, he has other positives too. Florida, young, nice looking, well-spoken. I don't know anything about his personal life. Think I'll go google him.

[salin]

18. oh wait

Wexler/waxman (why do I do that?!) Wexler is very good - seems he was in some of the showdown battles (which to me, means, he gets what he would be up against). Somehow, though, in my post I was thinking Waxman - not quite the sauve looking candidate but very tenacious.

[OKNancy]

20. Yeah I get those two mixed up too

http://www.wexler.house.gov/biography.htm

Found this. Wexler is the assistant Minority Whip, and in his second term was named "50 most effective legislators".

[salin]

23. Didn't he just file a suit (thought it was turned back) about bbv

regarding touchscreen machines which have no paper trail? Forced the whole state to have to drudge up the topic again (with the current sec of state claiming that they don't need paper receipts because the machines are never wrong - so no need for recount... and the special election with problems that were larger than the margin for the "win"... no problem at all...) Shows he knows how to bring heat to an issue. Very good, indeed.

[Mz Pip]

32. Waxman is from CA

no regional advantage there.

MzPip
:dem:

[salin]

33. ah - but the question isn't about the election (and you are correct)

but about what we need in terms of skills in the position once we win.
With those identified - we can look more broadly to who possesses similar skills.. and we can think more broadly about how we support those who have those skills (such as Waxman) in ways that help them become more powerful within congress.

[slinkerwink]

9. Bill Richardson

[salin]

10. Don't know enough about his experience before being Sec of Energy

to have a sense of whether or not he has the fighting credentials that will be needed.

[slinkerwink]

21. he's the governor of New Mexico

so I'd say he has some fighting credentials.

[salin]

24. The task at hand

will require arm twisting, savvy, and more than "being able to work with republicans" which had been the touchstone as a good sign for twenty years. Think - democratic side... dick cheney in terms of power hitter and stealth power broker.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. Hands down...Wes Clark.

:hi:

[salin]

14. he certainly had to live by commanding under two

competing entities (Nato and US)... and was successful. Would have to know more about the internal/political battles (all workplaces, including the military have them) to get a sense of how he might be able to out manuever teamDeLay.

Keep in mind - I think the General is great. He may be the man for the job... I am just looking for an arm twister extrodinaire - as this person will have to work the hill to beat the likes of DeLay.

[Jai4WKC08]

12. Clark (surprise)

Did a pretty good job working with the Repub Congress, squeezing money out of 'em as CinC Southern Command and then CinC European Command. Even when, in the latter job, he was fighting a war that many of those same Repubs didn't support.

He also has made a strong, effective case, and gained a reputation for fiscal responsibility--all of his social programs were hammered out to be deficit neutral or better--which appeals to the less partisan Repubs.

And he's a tough fighter.

There may be lower profile people as qualified on any of these, and I'm probably not well enough informed to recommend them. But if they're incumbent congresscritters, I'd sort of hate to see them taken out.

[salin]

19. He worked well with the Clinton team - in forcing

continued support for an effort that a) the GOP did not like... and b) the neocons hated (in terms of the joint role with NATO). Definitely qualifies as some heavy political lifting.

[Fovea]

13. Jean Sebelius

Dem Gov of Kansas.
Has strong commitment to education.
Used to working with/around Republicans,
knows the trade issues, and how NAFTA works within the framework
of domestic Trade. Very sensitive to job loss in our economy.

If our president is serious about jobs, they have to fix or destroy NAFTA. They might do a lot worse than Jean.

Oh, and she's a woman, too.

[salin]

16. tell me more...

highlight any legislative showdowns that she has had. She sounds very promising... however in my view "working with republicans" (ala the old model of bipartisanship) isn't going to be helpful as the Hill republicans no longer work with democrats... so being able to work/accomplish despite republicans... that is what we are looking for. I don't know her track record - and would love to hear more...

[King of New Orleans]

26. She's only been governor for 2 years

Way to little experience to even be considered.

[Fovea]

37. Not necessarily

But another Governor to look at would be Missouri's Bob Holden, who would seriously stand a chance of flipping Mo into the Blue column. Sebelius might do it in Kansas, though I suspect that Roberts could be toast anyway as he and Brownback have supported * uncritically, and by so doing hitched their wagons to a turd.

Either one of these would be a good choice. I do not think that Sebelius is green. She has worked hard to keep education funded and has had to deal with such problems as Boeing threatening to collapse the economy of a third of the state with a massive plant closing, as well as the Westar/DeLay energy-illegal fund raising scandal of the Texas Republican goon squad reaching over the border to KS.

Either one of these candidates can speak with authority on the damage Bush's policies have done to average working Americans.

[Mz Pip]

35. I thought

Sebelius was a Finnish composer?

Sorry 'bout that. coulndn't resist.

MzPip
:dem:

[MrSlayer]

17. Wesley K. Clark.

[King of New Orleans]

25. Yeah, my first choice would be Clark too

though he doesn't fit the mold this poster is asking for. Graham would be 2nd on my list. Richardson, Mark Warner are reasonable choices too.

[salin]

28. Thanks - I am asking a slightly different question (rather than favorite)

and it may lead nowhere... Will post the reason I ask this below (so others might read it - as sometimes side threads are less read.)

[Paradise]

22. General Wesley K. Clark

http://clark04.com/americanson/

You won't be sorry you watched it!

[napi21]

29. Max Cleland!

He was a great Senator, a war hero, a fighter, and pissed off enough to fight like hell!

[salin]

31. He was an admirable senator

and while he was somewhat restrained in his last election... he was faced full frontal assualt with the obsenity of the current GOP and does certainly seem now unrestrained and itching to fight. Knows the process, the players - and I would bet has some on the gop side that were friends and are currently embarrassed as hell by the behavior of their party.

[salin]

30. Why I ask this question - rather than "favorite VP"

Alot of thought has gone to the favorite question - and I am certain that this is how the campaigns are going about their selection.

I am just interested in a "brainstorming session" - to think a little more broadly. In doing so, perhaps we start thinking about a different strategy - not necessarily for the presidential election - but how we perceive legislative power positions (e.g., whips, minority/majority leaders, etc.) - and even how we consider candidates running for office in state and federal contests.

The republicans - starting in the late eighties - moved away from "strategy" as was known - sticking to some issues - then working for some bipartisan support for initiatives - but trying to win the overall form and vote. I spent a lot of time on the Hill during Reagan's second term both during republican and democratic rule of the senate (and all with democratic rule of the House.) The ascension of Newt Gingrich - marked a huge departure in how things were done. It became political hardball all the time (not new, except that hardball used to be reserved for specific instances)... moving into fullscale political warfare. While older democrats retired - some who had been very skillful at the hardball... the scripts changed. Often the democrats still seemed to be working from the bipartisan but outmanuever script while the republicans were working from a different perspective all together. This didn't fully become clear to the public (or at least part of the public) until the Clinton hunts via congress went broadscale and mainstream, after the congressional budget showdown in 1996. Imo, it has reached very dangerous levels - and the article I link below gives a great description of how. Thus - one of the roles of VP is working directly with the senate and broadly with Congress. It seems that one thing that might be important to consider is looking for those with the experience (and wins) in similar contexts - who know how to hardball - who have won difficult showdowns... who aren't striving to always look like they are getting along (which the repubs never try to appear to be doing - but will cry long and hard about 'obstructionism' on the otherside - a very neat orwellian trick)... but instead are ready to twist arms - out strategize and play hardball when needed (which if facing this particular congress - will be needed often.) In the end - this will play a big part as to whether an administration will have any effectiveness at all.

So when we think broadly - from congress to various statehouse leaders - who comes to mind as possibly being up for that kind of role - for now or in the future.

(referred to article: http://www.prospect.org/print/V15/2/kuttner-r.html )

[Auntie Bush]

34. How about Ted Kennedy...He's a fighter.

But wouldn't expect many crossover votes with him on the ticket.

I still think Wes Clark would be a real fighter and negotiator and he's a real fast learner.

[salin]

36. So who are future Ted Kennedys - who are in the pipeline?

I agree - he has the characteristics I am thinking of (and served with some real fighters) - but in terms of the actual slot - wouldn't do much for a ticket (and if Kerry runs - he couldn't run anyway.) We need to identify - and support the careers of future Ted K's.

I don't disagree that Clark might be up for the task - and I think he has received an object lesson through press treatment of how insidious the right can be... step one in becoming (if one chooses to be) a real political power/player. I would think, as well, that the only way to rise to the level that he did in the military - is to be very politically savvy - or to be a complete *ss kisser. He doesn't strike me as the latter.

[SerpentX]

45. Henry Waxman

One tenacious S.O.B.

[Zhade]

46. That is an extremely important article.

Everyone really should read the article salin linked to. It's very well-written and rich in detail.

[5thGenDemocrat]

38. Why not Dennis Kucinich?

Appeals to the liberal base, knows the game on several levels, is as tough as they come AND he's from a very important electoral state. Plus, he peels off those ten or twelve votes Nader is expected to get.
John
Clarkie. Wants Clark at Secretary of State.

[Shanty Oilish]

39. Edwards

It's usually someone you wouldn't expect, and this year will probably be no different, since tonight JE's surge has stalled. But if you look to a balanced ticket, and to the question of who'd be president after Kerry retires, Edwards is the plausible answer. I could be about as pleased with most other options, though; Kucinich or Graham or Richardson.

[incapsulated]

40. Ah, remember Dan Rostenkowski ...

Clinton gave him a pardon, bless him.


Nobody has mentioned Gephardt?

[5thGenDemocrat]

41. Gephardt would be an excellent pick, too

For many of the same reasons as Kucinich or Graham.
John
If I had to pick a favorite son of Michigan, I'd nominate John Conyers, too.

[kodi]

43. gephardt would be the best, he can work with congress

the white house is useless for the democrats unless they can get passage of their policy initatives thru congress....judges, federal appointments, etc.

gephardt has been there for more than 25 years, he knows where the bodies are and how to manuever in congress.

he brings in missouri and its electoral votes, he is strongly supported by labor unions, who will help get out the vote come november in the critical border states and industrial rustbelt states of the mid-west.

he can step in and be president if the worst happens.

[tkmorris]

42. Dick Durbin <nt>

[yellowdawgdem]

44. Nancy Pelosi

would be good, as would Gephardt. However, I think your pick Willie Brown was imaginative. He would be hard nosed enough to withstand the assaults from the repubs, no doubt. I have my reservations about Wes Clark, since he'd be on new territory, but I bet he'd be up for it. It is really challenging to try and visualize just the job, not the electability factor.

[yellowdawgdem]

48. Coming to think of it

Two more really tough kinda people would be Howard Dean and Tom Daschle.

[HFishbine]

49. Fact Check

NC does NOT have a republican governor. Furthermore, Edwards' seat is up for grabs this November (there will be no appointment) and there is a strong dem contender.